On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 05:48:56AM +1100, Joshua Root wrote: > On 2011-3-4 02:40 , Jack Howarth wrote: > > Are there any plans to attempt to move MacPorts towards > > building with clang once Xcode 4 is released? Considering that > > we have so many packages supporting gcc4x variants to build with > > FSF gcc, it seems strange not to do the same for clang. > > Jack > > ps I assume that Xcode 4 won't be held up until Lion is released so > > these clang variants could be first done on Snow Leopard. It is unclear > > from http://developer.apple.com/technologies/tools/whats-new.html > > if the clang c++ support in Xcode 4.0 will use the existing libstdc++ > > or the new libc++ instead. It would be nice if it were the latter. > > We already have configure.compiler settings for llvm-gcc-4.2 and clang. > Port maintainers can use these as desired. We default to whatever Apple > calls /usr/bin/cc on each OS. > > There's a default for darwin 11 in base already on spec (llvm-gcc-4.2).
Wow. That would surprise me as I was under the impression that in llvm development, llvm-gcc-4.2 was being given short shrift compared to clang. Certainly my own runs of llvm-2.8 and llvm svn's gfortran with the Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks has shown continued runtime performance regressions... http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2010-September/034780.html http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-February/038224.html This compares to clang which, as measured by the himenoBMTxpa benchmark anyway, appears to be improving towards FSF gcc's current performance. Jack > We can change that if it turns out to be wrong when Lion ships. > Otherwise this should all "just work". > > - Josh _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
